The human back is a complicated structure including bones, muscles, ligaments, tendons, nerves and other structures. The spinal column has interleaved vertebral bodies and intervertebral discs, and permits motion in several planes including flexion-extension, lateral bending, axial rotation, longitudinal axial distraction-compression, anterior-posterior sagittal translation, and left-right horizontal translation. The spine provides connection points for a complex collection of muscles that are subject to both voluntary and involuntary control.
Back pain in the lower or lumbar region of the back is common. In many cases, the cause of back pain is unknown. It is believed that some cases of back pain are caused by abnormal mechanics of the spinal column. Degenerative changes, injury of the ligaments, acute trauma, or repetitive microtrauma may lead to back pain via inflammation, biochemical and nutritional changes, immunological factors, changes in the structure or material of the endplates or discs, and pathology of neural structures.
The spinal stabilization system may be conceptualized to include three subsystems: 1) the spinal column, which provides intrinsic mechanical stability; 2) the spinal muscles, which surround the spinal column and provide dynamic stability; and 3) the neuromotor control unit, which evaluates and determines requirements for stability via a coordinated muscle response. In patients with a functional stabilization system, these three subsystems work together to provide mechanical stability. It is applicant's realization that low back pain results from dysfunction of these subsystems.
The spinal column consists of vertebrae and ligaments, e.g. spinal ligaments, disc annulus, and facet capsules. There has been an abundance of in-vitro work in explanted cadaver spines and models evaluating the relative contribution of various spinal column structures to stability, and how compromise of a specific column structure will lead to changes in the range of motion of spinal motion segments.
The spinal column also has a transducer function, to generate signals describing spinal posture, motions, and loads via mechanoreceptors present in the ligaments, facet capsules, disc annulus, and other connective tissues. These mechanoreceptors provide information to the neuromuscular control unit, which generates muscle response patterns to activate and coordinate the spinal muscles to provide muscle mechanical stability. Ligament injury, fatigue, and viscoelastic creep may corrupt signal transduction. If spinal column structure is compromised, due to injury, degeneration, or viscoelastic creep, then muscular stability must be increased to compensate and maintain stability.
Muscles provide mechanical stability to the spinal column. This is apparent by viewing cross section images of the spine, as the total area of the cross sections of the muscles surrounding the spinal column is larger than the spinal column itself. Additionally, the muscles have much larger lever arms than those of the intervertebral disc and ligaments.
Under normal circumstances, the mechanoreceptors exchange signals with the neuromuscular control unit for interpretation and action. The neuromuscular control unit produces a muscle response pattern based upon several factors, including the need for spinal stability, postural control, balance, and stress reduction on various spinal components.
It is believed that in some patients with back pain, the spinal stabilization system is dysfunctional. With soft tissue injury, mechanoreceptors may produce corrupted signals about vertebral position, motion, or loads, leading to an inappropriate muscle response. In addition, muscles themselves may be injured, fatigued, atrophied, or lose their strength, thus aggravating dysfunction of the spinal stabilization system. Conversely, muscles can disrupt the spinal stabilization system by going into spasm, contracting when they should remain inactive, or contracting out of sequence with other muscles. As muscles participate in the feedback loop via mechanoreceptors in the form of muscle spindles and golgi tendon organs, muscle dysfunction may further compromise normal muscle activation patterns via the feedback loops.
Trunk muscles may be categorized into local and global muscles. The local muscle system includes deep muscles, and portions of some muscles that have their origin or insertion on the vertebrae. These local muscles control the stiffness and intervertebral relationship of the spinal segments. They provide an efficient mechanism to fine-tune the control of intervertebral motion. The lumbar multifidus, with its vertebra-to-vertebra attachments is an example of a muscle of the local system. Another example is the transverse abdominus, with its direct attachments to the lumbar vertebrae through the thoracolumbar fascia. The thoracolumbar fascia is a deep investing membrane which covers the deep muscles of the back of the trunk. The thoracolumbar fascia includes superficial fascia and deep fascia. The superficial fascia is traditionally regarded as a layer of areolar connective or adipose tissue immediately beneath the skin, whereas deep fascia is a tougher, dense connective tissue continuous with it. Deep fascia is commonly arranged as sheets and typically forms a stocking around the muscles and tendons beneath it. Superficial fascia fibers run in the transverse direction, whereas deep fascia fibers run in a cranial-caudal direction.
The multifidus is the largest and most medial of the lumbar back muscles. It has a repeating series of fascicles which stem from the laminae and spinous processes of the vertebrae, and exhibit a constant pattern of attachments caudally. These fascicles are arranged in five overlapping groups such that each of the five lumbar vertebrae gives rise to one of these groups. At each segmental level, a fascicle arises from the base and caudolateral edge of the spinous process, and several fascicles arise, by way of a common tendon, from the caudal tip of the spinous process. Although confluent with one another at their origin, the fascicles in each group diverge caudally to assume separate attachments to the mamillary processes, the iliac crest, and the sacrum. Some of the deep fibers of the fascicles that attach to the mamillary processes attach to the capsules of the facet joints next to the mamillary processes. The fascicles arriving from the spinous process of a given vertebra are innervated by the medial branch of the dorsal ramus that issues from below that vertebra. The dorsal ramus is part of spinal nerve roots formed by the union of dorsal root fibers distal to the dorsal root ganglion and ventral root fibers. The dorsal root ganglion is a collection of sensory neurons that relay sensory information from the body to the central nervous system.
The global muscle system encompasses the large, superficial muscles of the trunk that cross multiple motion segments, and do not have direct attachment to the vertebrae. These muscles are the torque generators for spinal motion, and control spinal orientation, balance the external loads applied to the trunk, and transfer load from the thorax to the pelvis. Global muscles include the oblique internus abdominus, the obliquus externus abdmonimus, the rectus abdominus, the lateral fibers of the quadratus lumborum, and portions of the erector spinae.
Normally, load transmission is painless. Over time, dysfunction of the spinal stabilization system is believed to lead to instability, resulting in overloading of structures when the spine moves beyond its neutral zone. The neutral zone is a range of intervertebral motion, measured from a neutral position, within which the spinal motion is produced with a minimal internal resistance. High loads can lead to inflammation, disc degeneration, facet joint degeneration, and muscle fatigue. Since the endplates and annulus have a rich nerve supply, it is believed that abnormally high loads may be a cause of pain. Load transmission to the facets also may change with degenerative disc disease, leading to facet arthritis and facet pain.
For patients believed to have back pain due to instability, clinicians offer treatments intended to reduce intervertebral motion. Common methods of attempting to improve muscle strength and control include core abdominal exercises, use of a stability ball, and Pilates. Spinal fusion is the standard surgical treatment for chronic back pain. Following fusion, motion is reduced across the vertebral motion segment. Dynamic stabilization implants are intended to reduce abnormal motion and load transmission of a spinal motion segment, without fusion. Categories of dynamic stabilizers include interspinous process devices, interspinous ligament devices, and pedicle screw-based structures. Total disc replacement and artificial nucleus prostheses also aim to improve spine stability and load transmission while preserving motion.
There are a number of problems associated with current implants that aim to restore spine stabilization. First, it is difficult to achieve uniform load sharing during the entire range of motion if the location of the optimum instant axis of rotation is not close to that of the motion segment during the entire range of motion. Second, cyclic loading of dynamic stabilization implants may cause fatigue failure of the implant, or the implant-bone junction, e.g. screw loosening. Third, implantation of these systems requires surgery, which may cause new pain from adhesions, or neuroma formation. Moreover, surgery typically involves cutting or stripping ligaments, capsules, muscles, and nerve loops, which may interfere with the spinal stabilization system.
Functional electrical stimulation (FES) is the application of electrical stimulation to cause muscle contraction to re-animate limbs following damage to the nervous system such as with stroke or spine injury. FES has been the subject of much prior art and scientific publications. In FES, the goal generally is to bypass the damaged nervous system and provide electrical stimulation to nerves or muscles directly which simulates the action of the nervous system. One lofty goal of FES is to enable paralyzed people to walk again, and that requires the coordinated action of several muscles activating several joints. The challenges of FES relate to graduation of force generated by the stimulated muscles, and the control system for each muscle as well as the system as a whole to produce the desired action such as standing and walking.
With normal physiology, sensors in the muscle, ligaments, tendons and other anatomical structures provide information such as the force a muscle is exerting or the position of a joint, and that information may be used in the normal physiological control system for limb position and muscle force. This sense is referred to as proprioception. In patients with spinal cord injury, the sensory nervous system is usually damaged as well as the motor system, and thus the afflicted person loses proprioception of what the muscle and limbs are doing. FES systems often seek to reproduce or simulate the damaged proprioceptive system with other sensors attached to a joint or muscle.
For example, in U.S. Pat. No. 6,839,594 to Cohen, a plurality of electrodes are used to activate selected groups of axons in a motor nerve supplying a skeletal muscle in a spinal cord patient (thereby achieving graduated control of muscle force) and one or more sensors such as an accelerometer are used to sense the position of limbs along with electrodes attached to muscles to generate an electromyogram (EMG) signal indicative of muscle activity. In another example, U.S. Pat. No. 6,119,516 to Hock, describes a biofeedback system, optionally including a piezoelectric element, which measures the motions of joints in the body. Similarly a piezoelectric crystal may be used as a muscle activity sensor as described by U.S. Pat. No. 5,069,680 to Grandjean.
FES has also been used to treat spasticity, characterized by continuous increased muscle tone, involuntary muscle contractions, and altered spinal reflexes which leads to muscle tightness, awkward movements, and is often accompanied by muscle weakness. Spasticity results from many causes including cerebral palsy, spinal cord injury, trauma, and neurodegenerative diseases. U.S. Pat. No. 7,324,853 to Ayal describes apparatus and method for electrically stimulating nerves that supply muscles to modify the muscle contractions that lead to spasticity. The apparatus includes a control system configured to analyze electrical activity of one or more muscles, limb motion and position, and mechanical strain in an anatomical structure.
Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) is a subset of the general field of electrical stimulation for muscle contraction, as it is generally applied to nerves and muscles which are anatomically intact, but malfunctioning in a different way. NMES may be delivered via an external system or, in some applications, via an implanted system.
NMES via externally applied skin electrodes has been used to rehabilitate skeletal muscles after injury or surgery in the associated joint. This approach is commonly used to aid in the rehabilitation of the quadriceps muscle of the leg after knee surgery. Electrical stimulation is known to not only improve the strength and endurance of the muscle, but also to restore malfunctioning motor control to a muscle. See, e.g., Gondin et al., “Electromyostimulation Training Effects on Neural Drive and Muscle Architecture”, Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 37, No. 8, pp. 1291-99 (August 2005).
An implanted NMES system has been used to treat incontinence by stimulating nerves that supply the urinary or anal sphincter muscles. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,199,430 to Fang describes implantable electronic apparatus for assisting the urinary sphincter to relax.
The goals and challenges of rehabilitation of anatomically intact (i.e., non-pathological) neuromuscular systems are fundamentally different from the goals and challenges of FES for treating spinal injury patients or people suffering from spasticity. In muscle rehabilitation, the primary goal is to restore normal functioning of the anatomically intact neuromuscular system, whereas in spinal injury and spasticity, the primary goal is to simulate normal activity of a pathologically damaged neuromuscular system.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,428,728 and 8,606,358 to Sachs, both assigned to the assignee of the present disclosure, and both incorporated herein in their entireties by reference, describe implanted electrical stimulation devices that are designed to restore neural drive and rehabilitate the multifidus muscle to improve stability of the spine. Rather than masking pain signals while the patient's spinal stability potentially undergoes further deterioration, the stimulator systems described in those applications are designed to reactivate the motor control system and/or strengthen the muscles that stabilize the spinal column, which in turn is expected to reduce persistent or recurrent pain.
While the stimulator systems described in the Sachs patents seek to rehabilitate the multifidus and restore neural drive, use of those systems necessitates the implantation of one or more electrode leads in the vicinity of a predetermined anatomical site, such as the medial branch of the dorsal ramus of the spinal nerve to elicit contraction of the lumbar multifidus muscle. For lead implantation using the Seldinger technique, it has been proposed to insert a needle in the patient's back, insert a guidewire through a lumen in the needle, remove the needle, insert a sheath over the guidewire, remove the guidewire, insert the electrode lead through a lumen of the sheath, and remove the sheath. Such a process can result in complications depending on the insertion site due to anatomical structures surrounding the target implantation site, impeding the insertion path. For example, as discussed above, the deep back muscles are covered by the thoracolumbar fascia which comprises superficial fascia running in the transverse direction and deep fascia running in a cranial-caudal direction. There is a risk that electrode lead conductors may experience a tight bend near the location where the lead enters the thoracolumbar fascia when the lead is inserted within the body near the lateral edge of the spine. Such a tight bend may lead to dislodgement of the electrode lead and/or fracture, thereby preventing proper therapy delivery. The difference in directions of the superficial and deep fascia near the insertion site at the lateral edge of the spine may increase the risk of a high stress location on the lead.
It would therefore be desirable to provide systems and methods for implanting an electrode lead to rehabilitate muscle associated with control of the lumbar spine to treat back pain with reduced risk of a high stress location on the lead and dislodgement of the electrode lead by surrounding anatomical structures.